News   Mar 27, 2024
 1.2K     1 
News   Mar 27, 2024
 1.1K     2 
News   Mar 27, 2024
 637     0 

miWay Transit


Look at posting #567 as all the info is in the link.

Route 33 7days a week

Sat Cancellation
Route 29 south of Clarkson
Route 14

Sunday Cancellation
Route 31 Heartland
Route 68
Route 36 revise schedule
Route 41

More service in 2011 as Council rejected report 2 for cutting of service not in place.
Route 3
Route 51
Route 19C
Route 35

I made the following recommendations to the budget committee:
Support staff recommendation for fare and service cuts, but not for 38 and 51

1: That a policy review take place to allow pass holders to use BT service within the limits of the City of Mississauga.

2: That a policy be adopted for pass holders how their weekly, monthly and yearly pass can be added to the Presto Card.

3: That the City adopt a policy of moving to a grid system and move away from a hub and spoke system, especially surrounding Sq One Bus Terminal. The City does not have the funds to build a new $30-50 Million Dollar new Sq One Terminal that will be able to handle 100,000 daily ridership by 2030.

4: The City adopt a policy that various low performance route be converted to a cab to/from bus system after a certain time 7 days a week.

5: The city develop a plan how to move the current 10% of population transit riders to 35% by 2025.

6: The City adopt a policy of charging a year fee for extra parking at the end of driveways and overnight parking.

7: That the following routes be terminated starting with the 2012 board period;

Route 8/14 between Port Credit and Clarkson GO Station after 7 pm and all day Saturday. Sunday service can never support service on this route. Service replace by cab.

Route 6 to terminated east of Creditview/Central Parkway outside of peak hours operating between Dundas St and Burnhamthorpe Rd.

Route 23 terminate service north of Clarkson GO Station, 7 days a week. Cab service be use.

Route 110 be terminated south of UToM 7 days a week.

Route 101 be terminated at UToM due to the fact that riders are wasting their time by going off route for the 10 minute trip to/from UToM today.

Route 29 and 29A south of Clarkson GO Station with service replace by cab.

Route 31 north of South Common Mall after 7pm and as per staff recommendation.

Route 61/61A south of Sq One Terminal replace with route 91 7 days a week.

Route 61A service Cooksville GO Station only by running south on Mavis Rd. This will require 61 to be beef up like it needs to be.

A review to see if Route 17 is needed or to be modify.

Route 33 be terminated and as per staff report.

Route 19A/B be converted to a ring road system north of Matheson Rd to feed into 19, 103 and 502 6 days of the week. 19A would terminate a Courtenypark Rd northbound and start southbound at Courtneypark Rd.

All Route 19 would do a stop and go at Sq One Terminal to cut down on the excess layover times for the drives and improve headway time.

Route 3 would reverted to the current weekday routing for Sunday Service with headway being reduce to 18 minutes from the current 23 minutes.

All layover time at Dixie Rd for Route 3 be removed including excess traveling along the route. This will improve headway time as well run time.

Route 26 routing would terminate west of South Common Mall terminal by using Burnhamthorpe 100% westbound and return by current routing. Oakville Transit would replace the service of 26 west of South Common Mall Terminal. This would improve the current headway 7 days a week.

Route 26 be removed from Sq One Terminal and become a grid route only along Burnhamthorpe. Riders going north of Sq One Terminal have the option of transferring to the current routes 3, 6, 61, 19, and 28. This would removed 3 buses a day as well a faster route to bypass Sq One. A few extra minutes to get to/from the mall. Riders would see better headway than they do now 7 days a week.

The Review of 34 be undertaken as to number of riders going west of Guildwood Way to see if route 68 should replace this route as well requiring riders to transfer to Route 35. This would require route 35 to run 7 days a week which it should be doing now as well late at night.

A yearly public meeting be held for riders feedback on current service as well improvement. MT is the only system in the GTAH area not to do this.

A transit advisory committee be form. I have supplied staff with a number of options how to do it including how SPETA of Philadelphia does it today, since I know various people there personally. I also have contacts with other systems.

That the City start looking at TOD for all parts of the city to help supporting transit in the first place and reduce traffic increase. Otherwise, we will be choking on the greenhouse effect, lost production and increase cost of moving goods if we don’t.

Stop spacing needs to be review as too many stops are too close with some only a few 100’s feet apart. Stops should be at major intersections and no more than 400 meters apart. This would improve run time.

Transit needs to be looked at as a network within a network that
service most of the riders need, not that of a few.

Next time a residents complains about empty buses or buses on their road asked them the following question.

Do you used transit?

Why don’t you use transit?

Where do you plan to put all the extra cars on the road if transit does not exist?

How much extra time are you prepared to spend with everyone using cars to get around in place of transit?
 
Look at posting #567 as all the info is in the link.

Route 33 7days a week

Sat Cancellation
Route 29 south of Clarkson
Route 14

Sunday Cancellation
Route 31 Heartland
Route 68
Route 36 revise schedule
Route 41

More service in 2011 as Council rejected report 2 for cutting of service not in place.
Route 3
Route 51
Route 19C
Route 35

Sunday Route 41 Thomas was not recommended by MT for cancellation... are you saying that City Council went against the recommendation of MT staff? It would be a big mistake given that the 33 is being canceled. It would leave a huge gap in service coverage unless the 35 were given Sunday service.

Glad that 35 is getting more service, but will there be Sunday service?

Route 6 to terminated east of Creditview/Central Parkway outside of peak hours operating between Dundas St and Burnhamthorpe Rd.

...

Route 26 be removed from Sq One Terminal and become a grid route only along Burnhamthorpe. Riders going north of Sq One Terminal have the option of transferring to the current routes 3, 6, 61, 19, and 28. This would removed 3 buses a day as well a faster route to bypass Sq One. A few extra minutes to get to/from the mall. Riders would see better headway than they do now 7 days a week.

Cutting 6 and 26 out of CCTT would be a HUGE mistake. No more connection to GO York U buses, or the BRT? BAD idea.

Your suggestion for turning 6, 19A/B into loop routes doesn't make considering hardly anyone uses the new 25.

A review to see if Route 17 is needed or to be modify

17 and 50 can be combined into one route. There's no need for two separate routes here, when both have so low ridership, especially now there's the 35.

Route 110 be terminated south of UToM 7 days a week.

On weekdays, the 110 is the second most efficient route in the system, after 22 Finch, achieving close to 100% cost recovery. No cuts are needed. Only half the buses go south of UTM as is.
 
110 south of UTofM carries an average of 12 people in total for the round trip to Clarkson and back at a cost of $18 person. The cost ratio is too low and very expensive to run. I said before 110 was put on the road that the ridership did not exist to support it in the first place and been proven right today.

No problem with the rest of 110 route, but weekends does have issues.

Route 6 carries very few riders off peak and no need for it to go to CCTT. Doing the cut would increase the cost ratio.

Very few riders from 6 or 26 use GO or other routes. In most case riders are going to the mall. Going to a grid route, you can remove 3 buses, shorten the travel time for riders as well decrease the headway.

Anyone wanting on 26 or 6 wanting to use GO or another route out of CCTT have an option of using 61, 28, 3, 8 or 19 to do so. Its an extra 3 minute walk to the mall.

Having 25 replace both 19's is a cost saving.

Moving both 19's north, improves access for riders and reduces close doors and crush load buses. Don't forget, only haft the employment land is being used at this time.

My mistake on 41 as it didn't get cut.

I agree 35 should have Sunday service, but 33 is a lost leader as well 34.

Single seat riders are huge cost suckers unless you are paying more to ride that bus.

Need to move to transferring between routes, but need to watch headways.

Bottom line, if you want no cuts or changes, be prepare to pay double or triple fare increase come 2013 and beyond as the city wants cost ratio of 47% back up to 50% plus. I for one am not will to pay more so a few can ride in a cab bus when it is cheaper to put them in a cab today. Various councilors are saying the same thing.
 
Very few riders from 6 or 26 use GO or other routes. In most case riders are going to the mall. Going to a grid route, you can remove 3 buses, shorten the travel time for riders as well decrease the headway.

Anyone wanting on 26 or 6 wanting to use GO or another route out of CCTT have an option of using 61, 28, 3, 8 or 19 to do so. Its an extra 3 minute walk to the mall.

I have to disagree with this. Coming home from Toronto, sometimes I have to take the 26 (usually since the 109 doesn’t run off peak) and when the 26 docks at CCTT, about half the bus gets off and a good chunk of the people transfer on to other routes. Now I can't say this is true of every bus the pulls in throughout the day, but I do know that when the mall is closed, that's how it is. One of the arguments against transit is that it is inconvenient. To have a route like the 26 bypass CCTT is just making it more inconvenient for people because now they either have to run though the mall or if it's closed, around it (and for the record, it's like a 5 - 10 minute walk from Burnhamthorpe to CCTT) to catch their bus or transfer to another bus (for like 3 minutes) to take another one. Personally that needless extra transfer would make me not want to take the bus. If the 26 were to bypass stopping in the terminal, I think it should run along square one drive with a stop in front of the terminal (or somewhere around there). That way, it doesn’t have to stop for about 5 minutes, and doesn’t screw over people who need to transfer to another route.
 
I totally love the dial-a-ride idea (miCab? LOL). Hope your suggestion about that goes through. Will work great for Brampton's McVean as well.

51 is totally dead in the reverse peak direction and the off-peak hours, let alone Saturdays! It needs to connect to a significant ridership attractor (Dixie GO or Dixie Mall or etc.) to get to acceptable levels. Maybe a pilot project for that could work. 17 can become a 51B once the BRT is complete. Will help 51/51A riders as no one can get in a northbound 51/51A bus both at Burnhamthorpe and Rathburn during AM rush. But again, 51 is dead at the reverse peak direction, so how to deal with that?

Judging by Mississauga's current service levels, a grid system will not work as of now due to their frequencies even during the rush hours.

I think one of the reasons why 110 south of UTM is not popular is because 13 is still faster than 110 between South Common and Clarkson (due to the 110 serving UTM). Maybe the 110 can bypass UTM during weekends (however, doing this means that they need to adjust service during exam periods in December and April since some exams are held in Saturdays). A weekend 101 can bypass UTM as well, but same things go during exam periods.

26 cannot bypass Square One until the LRT gets implemented. Only 4 or 5 people remain in the 26 as it goes west of Square One. A few more when going eastbound.

The only thing that 61 needs is to increase its rush hour services.

Maybe it's time for 24/7 service for the 5 busiest routes?

And looks like the BRT bridge at Central Parkway will be installed today or tomorrow.
 
I have to disagree with this. Coming home from Toronto, sometimes I have to take the 26 (usually since the 109 doesn’t run off peak) and when the 26 docks at CCTT, about half the bus gets off and a good chunk of the people transfer on to other routes. Now I can't say this is true of every bus the pulls in throughout the day, but I do know that when the mall is closed, that's how it is. One of the arguments against transit is that it is inconvenient. To have a route like the 26 bypass CCTT is just making it more inconvenient for people because now they either have to run though the mall or if it's closed, around it (and for the record, it's like a 5 - 10 minute walk from Burnhamthorpe to CCTT) to catch their bus or transfer to another bus (for like 3 minutes) to take another one. Personally that needless extra transfer would make me not want to take the bus. If the 26 were to bypass stopping in the terminal, I think it should run along square one drive with a stop in front of the terminal (or somewhere around there). That way, it doesn’t have to stop for about 5 minutes, and doesn’t screw over people who need to transfer to another route.

I should have been more clear on the 3 minute to the mall. That time is for people going to the mall, not to CCTT. You currently have 3, 6, 8, 28, 61 and 19 going to CCTT by transferring to them.

The one thing both I and MT don't know is the true number of people transferring from one route to another. From general observation, most are going to the mall. Now some of them most likely transfer to another route after shopping, but that is guessing.

I do know from years of data collection, both 19 and 26 see 40-75% of rider get off at CCTT depending on the time of day. Weekends are a little higher and that shows riders are going to the mall than transferring to other routes.

If the goal is to get more people to use transit, transit needs to be faster than it is today. It also must met the needs of the many, not the few.

Both 19 and 26 loose 15 minutes of travel time/add 15 extra rider travel time by going to CCTT than bypassing.

Once the BRT comes on line in 2014, routes 3, 20, 26 will see a decrease in ridership as riders will use the BRT to get to CCTT from Islington.

Route 61 has a longer travel time south of CCTT and carries next to no riders and stop riders using GO Cooksville station and keep them in their car.

As it stands now, CCTT was never built for the current 45,000-50,000 daily riders when it was first built nor will be able to handle the 100,000 by 2030/40. Therefore various routes needs to be moved out of CCTT to deal with the overcrowding in the coming years until a new $30-50 million terminal is built.

At the end of the day, riders will have to get use to doing a transferring between routes as single seat rides are too expensive to operate unless you are paying a premium price like GO.

At the same time, more time you add to the run time of a route, you are reducing the cost ratio to the point headways have to be increase to remove a bus or cut back, or cancel.

Over the years, route 26 has lost ridership due to increase of headway time and part of a shell that it used to be.

Ridership has always been higher east of CCTT and that may change with the development of that vacant land at Confederation and Grand Dr.

If everyone use a Presto Card, only then a true picture can be form how riders travel the system as to when, where and how often. Once you have that info, then a true transit system can be built and updated on a short time frame than today.

I know my recommendation will not go over well, but I look at the big picture how to keep a transit system as well improve on it to gain more riders, reduce cost. I only look at single route as how they fit into a network as well how many riders use it and cost ratio.

I use my travel example going to Aldershot station and catching a Burlington Transit Route 1W bus how I screw riders and reduce the cost ratio. In all the years I being doing this, 99.5% of the time, I am the only rider being pickup by BT that cause a 10 minute detour for 20-50 riders. That 10 minute trip cost BT $9+ and they only get $2 from me and GO. At the end of the day, BT is loosing about $200 a day by servicing this station when it never did before 2008.
 
The overcrowding of CCTT would be largely solved by the LRT and the BRT. It's not a big deal except for the short term.

If you really want a more grid-like system, you should convince MT to extend 39 Britannia to Airport Corporate Centre or give the 27 Matheson all-day service instead.

Very few riders from 6 or 26 use GO or other routes. In most case riders are going to the mall. Going to a grid route, you can remove 3 buses, shorten the travel time for riders as well decrease the headway.

Even if we ignore route 76, the 26 alone has 9,185 boardings per weekday, and is the third busiest route in the system, and one of the busiest in the 905, and most of these riders are simply just going to the mall? Seriously?

Why is the ridership so much higher on weekdays compared to Saturday if the ridership is largely comprised of Square One customers?

And, yeah, most riders of the 6 are going to CCTT for Square One or connecting to other routes, which is why I find it baffling you want to cut off service to CCTT, the only major trip generator of the route, especially when the route itself is not poor performer in the first place (is 2,130 boardings per weekday bad for such a short route?).

Loop routes only work if they serve a major destination or trip generator. In the case of route 36, it serves two major trip generators: South Common and the Vega power centre. Hence it is a success, possibly the busiest loop route in the GTA.

The 25 on the other hand serves no major trip generators, hence it is a huge failure with only around 100 boardings per weekday. Your proposal of route 6 would transform it from a well-used feeder route into another route 25.
 
If you want the City to have its buses on a grid system, you might want to stop destroying the grid and fixing it instead.

Creditview was disconnected.
Second Line was disconnected.

Why this city has a penchant for disconnecting its grid of concession roads I have no idea.

Britannia Rd E should really be reconnected too.

Hell Queensway should be finished in my opinion.
 
If you want the City to have its buses on a grid system, you might want to stop destroying the grid and fixing it instead.

Creditview was disconnected.
Second Line was disconnected.

Why this city has a penchant for disconnecting its grid of concession roads I have no idea.

Britannia Rd E should really be reconnected too.

Hell Queensway should be finished in my opinion.

Totally agree with you in more way than enough.

Queensway will not be completed because of the golf course. The city had a chance to do so 15 years or so ago before house got built to the west side of the river.

Creditview was kill as it was in a flood plain as well a greenbelt area.

2nd line was kill because the village wanted to remain as is. The mayor has thrown her hands in the air as this village keeps changing its mind as what it wants to be today.

There is a long range plan to tunnel Britannia Rd under/over 410 and the 401.

39 needs to go to Renforth like it was supposed over a year ago.

If you remove the south section of 110 as note, 110 will have a higher ratio than 22.

I have said in the past that 41 should go to Renforth also, as it would provide better service to the various complexes at Kennedy Rd that see next to no service on the weekends, let alone during the week.

There are many place in Mississauga where there is needs for more east-west/north south road. Look at the area south of the QEW as one area.

I have try over the years to get certain roads change with no luck other than getting widening of them stop. Pure poor road planning, but some of this existed before Mississauga came into existent.

As for 26, you cannot say what the total rider is going to A or X from the route ridership listing without looking at the route from inside of the bus more than 5 times. You need to do a stop by stop count for all trips daily for 2 weeks, let alone one week and you will see it has vast numbers of waves that vary from location to location. Dixie, Islington, CCTT and South Common are the 4 high points with a number of small point in between them that exceed the main points.

Since we have no real numbers to look at going back 5/10 years, we cannot say what the true % of increase of ridership has taken place over that time. 26 was #2 years ago and growth has fallen off for it compare to #1 that carries more today. Until I lost 2 hard drives at the same time with one being my backup and can't get the backup CD to read, I could post various routes numbers and cost that were in a spreadsheet for them.

They would show how many riders got on/off for every stops both in Mississauga and Toronto, what part of the route carry the most riders as well the cost ratio. I have a 100+ books of data going back to 2001 pack away.

As for 25, it service the industrial area and therefore it has no trip generator other Hurontario. You try walking to those areas during the winter months and one reason I support a ring route. If employers can't get labour when they want them, they will move their business to another city costing a lost to MT and the city.

As for 6, other than 3/4 trips at peak time, the average ridership east of Creditview is about 12 with higher numbers at times related to schools. I have seen less to the point it was costing over $17 per rider to ride that bus. At some point, that cost ratio is going to be reach as were do we make cuts to it. By cutting 6 back as proposed, you keep the same headway, but removing a bus from the route. This will increase the cost ratio for both 26 and 6. It finally caught up to 14.

Can any of you tell me from looking at the ridership numbers for the routes where and when the highest numbers of riders are using the route as well the number is???

If I can't, I know you can't.

Since I use #3 more these days, I can tell you the ridership for that route is east of Dixie Rd. At times ridership is high from Sq One and fall off east of Dixie Rd. It is all over the place 7 days a week for different times.

Therefore I put a challenge to you. Pick a route and time of day to ride it from end to end for a week doing the following: Count the riders getting off/on at each stop, mark the time down to the second when the bus comes to a full stop, mark the time to the second when the bus depart/arrive at the end of the run as well the stops; you need to ride the bus both ways using the same departure daily; use $1.66 revenue for every riders getting on the bus except children exempt from doing so; use $110 per hour as the cost to put a bus on the road these days, add up the numbers of riders getting on the bus.

You have 3 choices in how to collect this data: 1: use a 2x3 note book, 2: use a sheet listing all the bus stop number in one column, time in another column, riders on in another column, another column for riders off, 3: use a lap top with a spreadsheet like 2, but having 3 column under stop number. The route number need to go across the top. Regardless which method you used, you need a spreadsheet like 3 to put the data in.

How I have done mine in the past, column 1 is the day and date: column 2, bus number: column 3 bus schedule to depart: col 4, when bus at bay time: col 5, Number of riders on the bus arriving at bay which is zero in most cases: col 6 time bus depart: Col 7, bus depart time early or late: Col 8 number on bus: listing of stops. I have setup certain points along the route as block points to see how many got on and off as well the run time. At the end of the run I have the following columns: Run time for the bus, Total ridership, Revenue, Cost of bus based on total time to go from end to end as well layover rime for the return trip, cost ratio is rev/bus cost, real cost per rider to use the bus (cost/riders) . I then have X block columns showing how many riders on the bus, numbers got on/off for each of those block.

At each block point I have col showing how many riders have got on so far, another for off, total run time, bus late or early time.

To do the counting, you sit in the passenger side rear seat for 40' buses and in the high front diver side seat in the middle for the artic's. From time to time, you count the number of riders on the bus to see if it is jiving with your data count. At peak time, it becomes a challenge to count riders getting on/off especially on the artic's to the point you may gain or loose riders. When that happens, I use the current numbers and make a note if it. You will have a fun time doing the counting on artic's as you have to look at 3 doors for off.

I wouldn't asked you to do it, but I also note where and size of strollers get on and off. I use 4 classes for numbering stroller. I also note where accessibility riders get on and off. I also note if there are problems along the road and what are they. I also note large items that may block the front of the bus or other areas.

As you see, I do a real in depth analysis of a route. I also did it for every trip I took on MT as well the time of day regardless where I got on or off as it adds to the big picture.

Once you have numbers, we can arguer more about various routes.

I know when 86 ran, one of my recommendations before it was cancel was to kill 86 west of CCTT as ridership did not justify it in the first place.

The Quality of service on 26 can be blame on a group of 11 people who got the schedule to change, as they could not connect with the 31. 11 people screw 100's of riders by having more time added to the headway.

NOTE: Added on.
When the plan was to build the BRT ROW on Rathburn earlier this year before OMNERS shot it down, MT was going to remove a number of routes out of CCTT.

Route 26 was one of them and it was going to be as I proposed today as well years ago. They were seeing the same thing I was seeing.

MT was not sure at that time which other routes would be moved out as well, but 6, 8, 28 and 61 where being looked at with 28 and 61 maybe the only route going north of Bunhamthorpe to CCTT.
 
Last edited:
Mississauga already has a grid based bus network (a hybrid of grid and radial, really). Complaining that it is not enough of grid doesn't make sense to me. Maybe there are small changes to be made to enhance the grid, such as taking 10 of Huntington, combining 28/66, and as mentioned expanding 27/39. But otherwise the grid is already in place, unless you have strict definition of grid. Would the 5 Dixie be better if it were taken off Ogden and the service to Long Branch was removed? Doesn't make sense to me. The route 26 you want "fixed" is already a high ridership route. You're proposing fixes to problems that don't exist.

The Burnhamthorpe corridor has high enough ridership to have an alternative route that bypasses Square One, like the 7/34/35/89 setup on Eglinton. But to have ignore CCTT altogether kind of goes against what makes the corridor and the rest of the MT system (relatively) successful.

If you want the City to have its buses on a grid system, you might want to stop destroying the grid and fixing it instead.

Creditview was disconnected.
Second Line was disconnected.

Why this city has a penchant for disconnecting its grid of concession roads I have no idea.

Britannia Rd E should really be reconnected too.

Hell Queensway should be finished in my opinion.

Second Line W was split in order to preserve Meadowvale Village. It was replaced with a brand new arterial with the extension of Mavis Road.

I'm not sure how the realignment of Creditview affected anything considering it happened near the boundary and the road still connects directly to Derry.

Queenway would not be viable bus route even it were completed.

As for Britannia, there's a small obstacle in its reconnection and it's called the 401-403-410 interchange. If I'm not mistaken, it was the province who built that, not the City of Mississauga.

But the City of Mississsauga did build Glen Erin Dr, Rathburn Rd, Bristol Rd, Courtneypark Dr, Central Pkwy, Matheson Blvd...
 
Last edited:
Mississauga already has a grid based bus network (a hybrid of grid and radial, really). Complaining that it is not enough of grid doesn't make sense to me. Maybe there are small changes to be made to enhance the grid, such as taking 10 of Huntington, combining 28/66, and as mentioned expanding 27/39. But otherwise the grid is already in place, unless you have strict definition of grid. Would the 5 Dixie be better if it were taken off Ogden and the service to Long Branch was removed? Doesn't make sense to me. The route 26 you want "fixed" is already a high ridership route. You're proposing fixes to problems that don't exist.

The Burnhamthorpe corridor has high enough ridership to have an alternative route that bypasses Square One, like the 7/34/35/89 setup on Eglinton. But to have ignore CCTT altogether kind of goes against what makes the corridor and the rest of the MT system (relatively) successful.



Second Line W was split in order to preserve Meadowvale Village. It was replaced with a brand new arterial with the extension of Mavis Road.

I'm not sure how the realignment of Creditview affected anything considering it happened near the boundary and the road still connects directly to Derry.

Queenway would not be viable bus route even it were completed.

As for Britannia, there's a small obstacle in its reconnection and it's called the 401-403-410 interchange. If I'm not mistaken, it was the province who built that, not the City of Mississauga.

But the City of Mississsauga did build Glen Erin Dr, Rathburn Rd, Bristol Rd, Courtneypark Dr, Central Pkwy, Matheson Blvd...

Viable as a bus route or not, Queensway would have been a useful E-W link. And Britannia would have been even more useful.

Wrecking Creditview and Second Line was just stupid. More driving choices would be better, not less.
 
I understand both Creditview and Second Line being split. Financial Drive supposedly replaced Creditview. But what bothers me is the lack of official pedestrian/cycling link across the 407. Once nighbouring villages Meadowvale and Churchville are now really disconnected. The direct way between the two is to walk along the OBRY tracks.
 
The Transit division is forecast to be $1.2 million over budget due to:
• $3.3 million over expenditure due to higher than budgeted diesel
fuel prices.
• A favourable variance of $0.3 million in vehicle parts and
supplies primarily due to warranty and insurance claims.
• A favourable farebox revenue variance of $0.5 million resulting
from higher than planned ridership in the current year.
• A one-time payment from Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) of
$1.1 million .. TTC recently advised Mississauga Transit that
from 2007 onwards Mississauga revenue from a GTA fare pass
machine at Islington Station (approximately $0.2 million per
year) had been mistakenly going to York Region.
 
^ Higher than extected ridership is good news. I wonder how much extra ridership $0.5 million barebox revenue represents, and what exactly they mean by the "planned ridership". The budgeted ridership for 2011 was 31.3 million and later they revised the projection to be 32.6 million.

Viable as a bus route or not, Queensway would have been a useful E-W link. And Britannia would have been even more useful.

But this thread is about transit so...

Britannia is planned to be extended from Tomken to Kennedy, but there will be no continuous connection with the section west of Kennedy due to the highway interchange I mentioned earlier. But as I said, it's not like the city didn't build Matheson and Courtneypark to compensate. Two arterials is better than one.

And of course, unlike Matheson, Britannia doesn't go past the airport.

Wrecking Creditview and Second Line was just stupid. More driving choices would be better, not less.

Creditview is broken up into many sections in Brampton anyway, thanks to Churchville, Eldorado Park, the Credit River, Mt Pleasant.... it makes no difference at all.

Second Line is the same: the disconnection didn't have any negative effect at all, in fact the it had some positive effects. The City built Mavis Rd as a replacement, and Mavis/Chinguacousy goes much farther south than Second Line/Chinguacousy. Mavis is a viable bus corridor as well, and Second Line could not support regular bus service even if it were not disconnected.

They should keep the Second Line West bridge over the 401 open for cyclists and pedestrians though.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top